4.7 Article

Synchrony in hunting bags: Reaction on climatic and human induced changes?

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 468, 期 -, 页码 140-146

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.08.022

关键词

Roe deer; Hunting bag; Germany; North Atlantic Oscillation; Energy crops

资金

  1. Graduate School Environment, Society and Global Change (University of Freiburg)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Human induced land use changes negatively impact the viability of many wildlife species through habitat modifications and mortality, while some species seem to benefit from it. Roe deer (Capreolus capreolus), a wide spread ungulate increased both its abundance and range throughout Europe. This pattern is also reflected in the increasing hunting bags over the last 40 years. Such a development raises questions about the relationship between human hunting and population dynamics and, in particular, about the potential of human hunting to control related populations. We analysed and reconstructed annual hunting bags of roe deer for three federal states of northern Germany, Brandenburg, Lower Saxony and Mecklenburg West Pomerania for the years 1972 to 2011. Since 1992 the hunting bags from these three states are significantly higher than those reported for the years 1972-1991. Our reconstruction takes into consideration effects of climate variability, expressed by inter-annual changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation and impacts from rapeseed and wheat cultivation. We found that severe winters, which are indicated by negative values of the North Atlantic Oscillation during the months December-March, directly, or with a time lag of two years affect the number of deer shot. In contrast, an increase in the area used for rapeseed cultivation coincides with higher numbers of roe deer shot, with respect to the overall mean value. Consequently, we recommend that wildlife management addresses changes in large scale processes including land use pattern and climate variability. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All tights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据